[rfc-i] Reasons for going beyond ASCII art
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Fri Sep 21 16:40:23 PDT 2012
On 21/09/2012 18:58, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Greetings again. The -00 draft says:
> Arguments in favor of replacing ASCII art with more complex diagrams
> * Given the difficulties in expressing complex equations with
> common mathematical notation, allowing graphic art would allow
> equations to be displayed properly.
> People have expressed *many* reasons other than just that one. Off the top of my head, others that have been brought up include:
> * state diagrams with multiple arrows in different directions and labels on the lines
> * protocol flow diagrams where each step needs multiple lines of description
> * scenario descriptions that involve three or more parties with communication flows between them
> In fact, given how few times equations are used in our documents, even that one is minor relative to the others that are commonly mentioned.
A related point that is not mentioned is whether we have a requirement
to support colour or greyscale, or whether we require that an RFC can
be correctly printed in monochrome.
More information about the rfc-interest